Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Part IV STUDENT: In the meanwhile, let me say a few more words about the normative side of this philosophical account of explanation—unless you think that we have exhausted the subject? PHILIP: No, the normative dimension is probably the most important one. I par- ticularly used to like Peter Railton’s notion of an ‘ideal explanatory text’. STUDENT: But this is an attempt to establish an eternal standard for judging the quality of explanations. It is so far away from the real-world explanatory practices that is in the end useless! PHILIP: First of all, ideals need not be useful to be valuable. Further, you can never proceed to the formulation of normative judgments without some kind of an ideal. STUDENT: You are right, of course, with respect to your first point. Regarding your second point, I would only partly agree: normative guidance is required for any kind of activity and also for explanatory activity. Such guidance can, but need not invoke eternal ideals and even less so single ideals. Multiple values can guide explanatory activities, and I claim that they in fact do so. PHILIP: So, value pluralism is the key notion here. STUDENT: Yes. And a fine-grained normative account
Published: Jan 2, 2019
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.